How do you cover the loss of a huge tax cut when it obviously means the government will have less money coming in as the amount going out increases?
Embezzle all surplus Social Security revenue generated by the 1983 payroll tax hike.
Now you can support wars and other government programs while the money that belongs to the workers of the country will not be invested as it should be so any interest that could have been earned isn’t.
The way the system works, any funds over the amount needed each year to cover the checks of those receiving benefits is considered surplus. Rather than allow it to accrue interest, the government has used the surplus on other things, like unfunded wars, with the federal government issuing IOUs which can only be redeemed by raising taxes, cutting spending elsewhere, or borrowing.
The government owes Social Security $2.7 trillion, but the government is both unable and unwilling to repay the stolen money.
The government should enact legislation requiring the repayment of the stolen money, perhaps in installments over the next 30 years, and Social Security’s short-term problems would be fixed.
Ronald Reagan said,
“Social Security has nothing to do with the deficit. Social Security is totally funded by the payroll tax levied on employer and employee. If you reduce the outgo of Social Security, that money would not go into the general fund to reduce the deficit. It would go into the Social Security Trust Fund. So Social Security has nothing to do with balancing a budget or erasing or growing the deficit.”
Except when raiding the funds was a quick fix to cover the losses that resulted from Reagan’s tax breaks for the rich, which created a gigantic deficit, and instituting a Social Security tax increase which was promoted at the time as a way to strengthen Social Security and allow it to continue into the future.
In reality, rather than the government paying back our money that was taken, we were being made to cover that loss ourselves.
Reagan “borrowed” our money and then had us pay back that loan.
Avoiding having to pay back the government’s $2.5 trillion debt to Social Security is why so many politicians want to cut benefits.
A simple solution would be to give those who have been making more money on their ever repeating tax cuts, while those who pay into Social Security have had to pay more into it to cover the loss, a slight tax increase to pay us back, not be given more tax cuts to enjoy our money while we cover the debt.
Although the GOP likes to call the money we will be receiving after having paid into Social Security “entitlements” to make it sound as if we are getting some sort of gift and should be grateful, not demanding, about that, the real entitled are those who have been benefiting from tax cuts while we, the workers, have been covering their share of the national debt.
We pay in, but they withdraw.
So when Paul Ryan, who had voted in December for a trillion-dollar, deficit-funded tax cut, says we’ve got fiscal problems because of the “entitlements”, he is blaming the growth of Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security for the deficit so that he can play around with our money, not the government’s, in order to make up for the debt caused and cover the money the 1% will, again, not be paying in to help.